Abstract
A recent ruling in the Crown Court of Northern Ireland, R v. Hoey, [R v Sean Hoey.
2007, Crown Court of Northern Ireland] has raised questions about the validity of
one variant of DNA analysis, often termed LCN. The ruling and subsequent discussion
also raises questions about what constitutes validation of a technique.
This paper examines what can be achieved in a laboratory based validation study against
the Daubert standard and against guidance given in the UK. There is a significant
discrepancy between what can be achieved and the Daubert standard but much less of
a discrepancy against the UK guidance. Much of the difference relates to differences
in word usage, definitional difficulties, and a lack of mutual understanding and communication
between the judiciary and forensic scientists. This highlights a gap that needs attention.
Keywords
To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Forensic Science International: GeneticsAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
R v Sean Hoey. 2007, Crown Court of Northern Ireland.
B. Caddy, G. Taylor, A. Linacre, 2008, A review of the science of low template DNA analysis
- Reply: LCN DNA: proof beyond reasonable doubt?—a response.Nature Reviews Genetics. 2008; : 9
- National recommendations of the Technical UK DNA working group on mixture interpretation for the NDNAD and for court going purposes.Forensic Science International: Genetics. 2008; 2: 76-82
- Report of the European Network of Forensic Science Institutes (ENSFI): formulation and testing of principles to evaluate STR multiplexes.Forensic Science International. 2000; 108: 1-29
- A comparison of the characteristics of profiles produced with the AMPFlSTR®SGM Plus™ multiplex system for both standard and low copy number (LCN) STR DNA analysis.Forensic Science International. 2001; 123: 215-223
- The low-template DNA (stochastic) threshold-its determination relative to risk analysis for national DNA databases.Forensic Science International: Genetics. 2009; 3: 104-111
- Sequence analysis and characterization of stutter products at the tetranucleotide repeat locus vWA.Nucleic Acids Research. 1996; 24: 2807-2812
- An investigation of the rigor of interpretation rules for STR's derived from less that 100 pg of DNA.Forensic Science International. 2000; 112: 17-40
Daubert et al. v Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc., 509 US 579 1993.
Frye v The United States of America, 54 App DC 46, 293 Fed 1013 1923.
R v Harris, Ors in EWCA Crim 1980 2005.
- Extended survey on LCN analysis in DNA WG laboratories.in: 22nd meeting of the ENFSI DNA working group. 2005
P v. Dennis Louis Nelson, in S147051 Ct App. 3 C047366 Sacremento County Super. Ct No. 02F06021. 2008, Supreme court of California.
- Low copy number-consideration and caution.in: Twelfth International Symposium on Human Identification, Biloxi, Mississippi2001
- Development of a simulation model to assess the impact of contamination in casework using STRs.Journal of Forensic Sciences. 2004; 49: 485-491
T. Eichelbaum, J. Scott, Report on DNA anomalies for Hon Tony Ryall, Minister of Justice. 30 November 1999 Department of Justice Wellington.
Article info
Publication history
Published online: May 05, 2009
Accepted:
April 6,
2009
Received in revised form:
April 1,
2009
Received:
October 15,
2008
Identification
Copyright
© 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
